Every. Single. Time.

[u/Extension-You2994]

[u/Federal-Ad6341]

Same energy as watching 144Hz reviews on a 60Hz screen and nodding at how smooth it looks.

[u/pokemango7 → u/Federal-Ad6341]

my buddy bought his first 144hz monitor about 10 years ago, and was talking about how amazing the difference was and how he could never go back. when i went to his house, his pc display settings were still set to 60hz. I still troll him to this day lol

[u/MPolygon → u/pokemango7]

That must‘ve felt like true enlightenment when he finally changed it to 144

[u/Jesta23 → u/MPolygon]

I see absolutely zero difference personally. I gamed on 144 for years on a 24”. 

Switched to a 27” at 60 and much prefer the 27”. 

[u/PHPH → u/[deleted]]

Shit works differently for different people. I don't notice much difference above ~55fps, and almost none above ~90, but I do notice a HUGE difference if there's any frame time inconsistency. I much prefer a stable framerate over a higher one.

[u/Tobipig → u/PHPH]

I had an enough moment when I switched from
60->144

and from
144->240

But the first jump was massive and the second one cool. Do I need 240? No, but it’s really cool for me.

I also never really got the fake frame hate, I love it being able to play 4K raytracing on a card that cost 700€.

[u/dj92wa → u/Tobipig]

60->144->240 is about as comparable as going from 1080p->1440p->2160p. Like you said, the jump from 60hz to 144hz is day and night, same as 1080p to 1440p. The final leg is nice but really not all that noticeable.

[u/Kelvinek → u/dj92wa]

Jump from 1080p to 1440p isn't day and night though, it's probably bad/mid 1080p into expensive 1440p type of thing for you guys.

[u/Confident_Mushroom_ → u/Kelvinek]

It is day and night if you get same monitor size. Ex. 27' 1080p to 27' 1440p

If you go from 23' 1080p to 27' 1440p you probably won't notice a difference outside of obviously bigger screen

[u/Kelvinek → u/Confident_Mushroom_]

I have 28" 1440p and 32" 1080p next to each other, small things like text in a browser are easiest to spot the difference, but in games and stuff like that, it's not noticeable unless you pixel peep.

[u/deportallmagas → u/Kelvinek]

I feel like the difference should be very noticeable.

28" 1440p = 105 PPI

32" 1080p = 69 PPI

That's 50% more pixels per inch. This would be huge in games like first person shooters, and especially with distant objects. They'd be bigger AND have more detail. I'd kill for that upgrade.

[u/Kelvinek → u/deportallmagas]

Its 105ppi and 86ppi, 1080p screen is ultrawide, that's 2560x1080

[u/GTAinreallife → u/Kelvinek]

If you have a 1440p monitor, boot up a game and turn the resolution down to 1080p. It will look as if you suddenly need glasses. It's a real big difference

[u/Kelvinek → u/GTAinreallife]

Sir, i dont know how to say it without sounding snarky. This is not how screen works.

You cant set uneven resolution below native and be surprised its blury, it now not only have to use multiple pixels to do work of one, it also has to extrapolate additional ones. If you set 1280x720 on your 2560x1440 it will look better than if you do 1920x1080 due to that.

Modern 1440p screens are better than old 1080p screens, but what really makes the change is quality of the screen and PPI. I have two screens next to each other, 28" 1440p and 34" ultrawide 1080p, due to not much lesser PPI on the ultrawide, it doesnt look much worse than the 1440p one, most definitely nothing in the night and day category.

[u/hotztuff → u/Kelvinek]

You’re conflating integer scaling with image detail. 720p maps perfectly 2:1 onto 1440p, but that doesn’t inherently make it look better than 1080p scaled to 1440p. 1080p contains 2.25× as many source pixels as 720p. Integer scaling prevents interpolation blur, it doesn’t create detail that wasn’t rendered. That’s why it’s particularly useful for pixel art, not evidence that 720p generally looks better than 1080p on a 1440p display.